USA v. Mexico post game thread [R]

Sorry. Take two:

http://www.ussoccer.com/Multimedia/Media-Center.aspx#/id=8b449b28-edc8-42e7-b5d3-66ca6c2353f5

I'm not sure if the link will work, but it's on the site. (As of now, click 'media', then go two to the right.)

 

I liked what Robbie did yesterday. However, as a Crew fan I must warn you: his biggest issue is inconsistency. Sometimes he plays great games and then the next two games he disappears. I hope he can work on this and get better...for the sake of the Crew and also to give JK more options.

 

I agree. There has been many times Rogers plays well and one game then sucks in the next one.

 

One of the main items I took from tonight was that the quality gap between MLS and other leagues is closing.

Granted that MLS guys are in mid-season form and European guys are in pre-season form but the MLS guys showed good quality tonight. In past games, MLS guys might have been beaten badly against Mexican/Euro players even at this point in the schedule.

Obviously, the gap will be wider if this was played in February and no one is saying that MLS is as quality as the top Euro leagues but I think it does show the gap is closing.

 

I completely agree, you are dead on. It was long road for Mexico to gain back the "#1" spot in CONCACAF. Thats exactly my point, it wasn't over night like the OP that i was quoting. See what im getting at?

Yes they did, had you gotten those calls and won you still would have beat us in a friendly. The excuses are a two way street. I could say if Mexico didn't make those four subs that completely lost the shape of the team, then it would have been the U.S. who barely(maybe) escaped the defeat. It didn't happen. Like i said in my OP, the result was very fair.

You are totally right. Honestly to me your C team excuse in 2009 in Completely valid. The loss in Azteca, well that was always gonna happen right? Again, if you check my OP i was quoting a poster who seemed to believe that the U.S. regained the lead(or caught up) after tie-ing us in a friendly.

That said, in your post you mentioned the 2011 Gold Cup final. Wham! That's my point. The other games can be downplayed but the GC final can't. It was A team vs A team, official match for the regional crown, "Neutral" site,ticket to Confederations cup 2013, both teams had injuries, and very recent. Mexico won and that should be and IS the measuring stick. Thats the result that puts Mexico currently ahead of the US. Even if not by much, but ahead. I never said Mexico was ahead by a ton, because they aren't. Its not like we are Brazil all of sudden.

Being able to say you haven't beat us in two years/4 straight is just extra frosting to the important result that was the Gold Cup Final.

You are totally right, the U.S. right now reminds me of Mexico when Aguirre took over in 09. The U.S. is a young team with bags of young talent who is just trying to find its identity and they will. It really didn't come all together for Mexico IMO untill the GC 2011 when all four offensive starters were under 24, very dynamic and playing with incredible chemistry. Not to mention 2 young 23 year old defenders starting full-time in the backline(Moreno/Juarez) who completely locked up their starting spots for a long time.

Not to mention signing a competent coach in De La Torre, much like you guys have with Klinsi.

Like i said, im excited for you guys. Seriously, its very interesting i know im a fan of the rival but the Klinsi era is something to pay attention to. Hell, if I am interested to see what's gonna happen, you guys must be extremely excited. Heh, i know the feeling. Good luck.

Cheers!

 

The only press conference I see on the site is the pre-game one.

 

I secretly enjoy watching Mexico play when Gio is fit and Cheech is there. Purely enjoyable soccer. We wish you guys the best as long as it's not v. the USA.

 

It was there, but it isn't any more. the USsoccer twitter feed has a couple dead links to it. Sorry.

 

Two things to add.

1) Tello you are being completely reasonable in every way. Not that this is more than stating the obvious, but sometimes on these boards the obvious bears stating. We aren't suddenly better than Mexico again (though refereeing aside we clearly won last night).

2) Is anyone really surprised at observations like "Bradely and/or Torres were out of position and saddled with 3 defensive midfielders so they looked lost on the ball"? I am not sure how much we learned about things like Bradley v Beckerman v Jones given the drastic shift in formation and player types. Yes Beckerman looked way better in the 2nd half when Bradley and Jones went off. Might have had something to do with not having 3 defensive midfielders looking for non existent attacking players.

So what did we learn last night?

1) Castillo isn't the answer. I am not saying he can't play well against CONCACAF qualifying opponents... and maybe he drastically improves. But if he is our world cup left back, we will have failed to find a viable World Cup quality left back.

2) Klinsi isn't a moron. He had the guys for 3 days so he didn't try to play the entire match in what I am guessing is his preferred formation with a diamond midfield and a withdrawn forward behind the striker. Obviously he made some tweaks but he went with what the boys knew until it was clear that a come back was needed. I haven't seen many people talking about this when rating Klinsi. 3 days isn't much time to fully implement a new system, so was the 4-5-1 really a shock?

3) Shea can play. There has certainly been a legitimate question of what he could do against better than MLS opponents. I am not saying he is the next Ozil, but this discussion is over now, right?

4) Robbie Rogers is fast. Someone is going to be Klinsi's late game speed sub. Robbie has an inside track... pun intended.

5) It's not that Landon Donovan HAS to be in the middle of the field. As I recall he was quite effective for Everton on the wing. What he can't do, however is act as our attacking midfielder from the wing without a great performance from the right back. Could he be very good there with Holden/Dempsey playing AM/withdrawn forward? Sure. Michael Bradley? Not so much

6) Michael Orozco-Fiscal huh? Who saw that coming? I'm not inking him in as a first team starter. But he sure looked better than Ream did, and I am a big Tim Ream fan. Of course, he needs to stay away from stupid fouls and there was no Chicharito to deal with...

7) Edson Buddle = done

That's all I see. Anyone making a real judgment about Torres... or any of our first half 3 d-mids is probably going too far. The next lineup I hope to see will look something like chandler [ream/orozco/marshall] boca lichaj on d, holden at the front of a diamond with bradley at dmid and Dempsey on one wing and shea on the other and Landon withdrawn behind Altidore or Agudelo. Could always start both Altidore and Agudelo and put Landon on the other wing.

 

I hope you will understand why it is confusing for many US fans, when it comes to Mexican fans the measuring stick keeps moving to show the same result. For awhile the measuring stick was Azteca versus the last draw in the US...because that was the only angle that showed Mexico ahead. When the US on the GC and was off to the Confed, it was the last 164 years(slight exaggeration) worth of games that was the measuring stick.

Now it's the last big game that Mexico won.

To be honest I think the fact that the measuring stick keeps moving is a telling sign. The fact that now the 'game that counts' is the last one that Mexico won is even more encouraging for US soccer.

(Edit: Not weighing in on who is better, just discussing the points. Between two rivals the better team is the one that wins the next game imo.)

 

I am going to disagree with that. I don't think that Mexico dominated 60 minutes of play at all. They certainly held more possession, that is true. Then again that has always been true even when the US was always winning.

Possession does not equal domination.

 

smh the gif converter frame rate is too slow to keep up with klinsy's dancing.

 

for all the talk of "fair result" because Mexico dominated the first half, well I don't understand it really.

Mexico had alot of possession but it reminded me of Arsenal where their possession usually results in little actual goals, like there's a force field around the 18 yard box and everything just stops.

Possession without scoring is just masturbation. (at least as it relates to winning a game or deserving to) There's something to be said for making the other team chase and tire out, sure, but to say it's a fair result , well , results are goals and winning.

and although Dolo may be adjudged to have been a bit lucky overall at least one stone cold penalty was denied to the US if not 2 as well as a clear, clear corner kick and certain red card with 10mins. to go.

the team with the most luck last night was Mexico.

 

I agree. I think the Red Bulls and Arsenal would agree also.

 

I think the biggest thing to take away from this game about what a particular player can't do is this: Torres doesn't look like a good choice to play in a wide attacking midfielder role. I wonder how our central midfield triangle would have worked at the start of the game if Shea were swapped for Torres.

 

Let's not get complacent with a draw vs Mexico. Mexico is still ahead of us. It doesn't matter by how much or how little. 20 minutes of the game doesn't make up for the other 70. We still had trouble passing out of pressure and putting together passes. Our off the ball movement was bad and our transition from defense to offense was worse. Too many times we would win the ball and our players were just standing around. We don't spread the field enough and switch the point of attack. There was a few points where I was happy with our play. When we pressure Mexico and run at them they are uncomfortable. Also many haven't spoken of this but the only bright spot of the first half was our one touch passing sequence the led to mexico being out of shape and were forced to foul. JK gives me hope that we become something great. I can't wait till we play CR and Belgium.

 

Well yeah, you are exactly right. The game that counts is the one and only one that as a Mexico fan i would hold over your head. Im not one of those guys who jump in here in say well we beat you 5-0. Im not going to say well you guys did fantastic in the Confederations Cup....but hah! We beat you in the Azteca!

Now if we beat you in Columbus then well, yeah. Then ill go on to say that we are starting to really pull away. Untill then, the last (as you put it) "game that counts" was won by a Mexico team that was the better side. That is why IMO we are ahead. Not by alot, but indeed ahead of the U.S.

Well that's just a difference of opinion that we seem to have. That's fine. Your right, it's not like we did much with all that possession. We should of killed you off, we didn't.

Also i agree with what you say about it being the same as when the U.S. was winning but i think this Mexico team contrary to its predecessors has much more confidence and ability. Like i said, maybe if Mexico didn't make subs then they would have kept shape and possession. But hey, why shouldn't they make subs? It was indeed a friendly that allowed 6 subs so why not.

Or hell, maybe even if Mexico Had Not made the subs maybe the U.S. still would have had an offensive explosion. Like i said, there is no point in going into the could have, would have discussion. Ill just take it for what it is/was. A friendly where the late in the game for whatever reason(subs,no calls, whatever) the U.S. played an inspiring 30 minutes of soccer. That no one can take away or deny, i certainly won't. If i was in your shoes i would be just as excited as most of your probably are. I get it, you found something to be genuinely excited about. I would be happy and optimistic about it too.

Its like the Mexico 2009 Gold Cup team. We thrashed your reserve squad. I was happy about the result but not because i thought we had caught up to you in the rivalry. It wasn't about Mexico VS USA and who was better at the time, especially since it was clear to me that the U.S. was better at the time. It was strictly about Mexico and its bright future/potential which two years down the road in 2011 became a reality. I knew that we had the raw talent to catch you guys and that result on that night in 2009 was not the result we needed to prove it. The result we needed the was 2011 Gold Cup Final and we got it.

This is what the U.S. fans(and i) IMO should have gotten from last nights match. Not that you had caught up, but realized that you indeed had the potential to catch right back up with us. Last night was strictly about the U.S. and the flashes of promise for the future, and who knows maybe when Klinsi's team has a solid identitiy then you will have another shot at us and indeed once again catch up.

As a huge fan of El Tri that night it Pasadena was incredible because i had sat through an awful 2 and a half-year spell of the Mexico National Team being in disarray(07 to mid 09). The 2009 Gold Cup we saw a sign of hope, but just the beginning, we still had not proved anything. The 2011 Gold Cup to me culminated a two-year journey of getting back to where we wanted to be in the Mexico-U.S. Rivalry and as a program in general. To me it healed the wounds of the 2007 Gold Cup Final and all the other crap i had to put up with.

Maybe that feeling/moment is indeed in the cards for you, but not yet.
We had to be patient, now its your turn.

 

Perspective is only acquired through experience.

The US needed over an hour to put their first shot on frame. Guardado, Barrera and Zinha, to a lesser extent, weaved in and out of the US midfield and defense at will throughout the first half and the first 15 minutes of the second half. It's funny how you guys only seem to remember the last twenty minutes.

With that said, the US did enough in those last 20-25 minutes to win the game. The two shots Ochoa stopped were aimed right at him so I don't understand the over excitement from US fans in that regard.

LOL

Your dad is Mexican and so are you.

I said what?

If you think playing well the last twenty minutes of a friendly match is something to hang your hat on, go right ahead. It only proves how desperate you are for a result against Mexico.

The same problems Bradley faced are still there. Players who are uncomfortable moving the ball quickly with one or two touches, off the ball movement and pedestrian passing quality from the center midfielders.

Yup. Twenty minutes sure fixed that.

The sad thing for you is that what Klinsmann is trying implement in the US has already been done in Mexico and is already providing results. We also have young players waiting on the wings to take over for the older guard.

Besides, we won the game that mattered six weeks ago while you sit here and celebrate a 1-1 win. Seems like you're back to your old self now and the delusional crap that comes along with it.

My my.....how the mighty have fallen.

 

We looked like crap for the first 45 minutes.

We looked much better in the second 45 minutes.

Donovan as the attacking central midfielder is the way to go.

Torres inside is much better than a Torres on the flank.

Brek Shea impressed the hell out of me.

Stuart Holden will only make the midfield selections more difficult when he regains fitness.

 

Nah, whoever the coach is, should consult where Donovan feels like playing and build the lineup around that.

Perhaps he gets stale after a while at one spot and needs a switch.

We've been down this road with LD under BA, BB and present. LD has his peaks and valleys, but he usually seems to respond after giving him a new role.

Maybe he wants to play left back. Kill two birds with one stone.

 

No problem, not your fault.

 

Mexico of course had a ton of chances in June, but the US did as well. Klinsmann emphasized defensive spacing over attacking play yesterday and it worked. Mexico really did get no clear cut chances except the goal, but the US did not have a single shot. I'm not really sure why Mexico faded out of the match in the 2nd half though.

But it does suggest that maybe Bob Bradley should have gone with a more conservative lineup in June.

 

I hate reading this back and forth bullshit with the Mexican fans..Most of them are delusional with their analysis and their arrogance. As are some Americans with what they seem to be posting.

1. Mexico is clearly the better team, no question about it, they're better!!
2. This was a good result for the US squad, Mexico always dominates the ball, we all know that, but how many opportunities did they have not only in their total domination of the first half, but also the second? Really, be honest, how many? They always look good with their control of the game, but what matters is to score a goal..
3. Mexicans can hang their hat on winning the GC, that's what mattered and they won so their number 1 now, but enough with the BS about the GC a few years ago when they went up against our C squad, really? that's what you guys are arguing? really?
4. It's a new cycle for us, of course Mex is better, but whats up with your insecurities? I think oyu guys are a lil off with your commentary. You're better, I know it's something new for you guys, it's been a while and you don't know how to handle it, but just enjoy it!!

 

the US only had 2 shots on goal against Spain in the Confed Cup as well, you know how that turned out don't you?

I watch the "poor man's Barcalona" a.k.a. = Arsenal weave in and out all the time but oftentimes the end result isn't there.

what is your point?